A Call to Prioritism

I’ve followed with interest the debate about social justice. We seem to struggle with a definition of what it is, much less agree on what to do to achieve it. The Lord Jesus issued two primary commandments to His followers: The Great Commission and The Great Commandment. Of course, the Great Commission is found in Matthew 28:18-20—

“And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” (NASB)

We find the Great Commandment in Matthew 2:36-39–

“Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And He said to him, “‘YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’” (NASB).

We would all agree that these words from the mouth of our Savior have equal importance and authority. The problem comes when we try to obey both
simultaneously and equally.

Dr. Al Mohler spoke about this in this in his recent remarks in the Southern Seminary chapel. He spoke of conversionists and transformationists. The conversionists emphasize evangelism and missions, while the transformationists seek to do good to all people and transform society. Dr. David Hesselgrave wrote a great book on missions in 2005: “Paradigms in Conflict.” In chapter four of that book, he discussed the dilemma faced by foreign missionaries. Should they focus on evangelism and church planting or should they alleviate the physical suffering that they encounter in developing countries? In his book, Hesselgrave used the terms “holism” and “prioritism.” In the chapter, he wrote that though foreign missionaries have always sought to do ministry to social/physical needs, historically they have prioritized evangelism.

This debate is not a new development in church history. In the early years of the twentieth century, Walter Rauschenbusch and others founded a movement called “the Social Gospel Movement.” Faced with grinding poverty in America’s cities, they declared that it was not enough to offer salvation; churches should seek to minister to the whole person, alleviating suffering as best they could. The conservative churches reacted to the Social Gospel Movement and the influx of liberal theology into the USA by publishing “The Fundamentals,” a series of books on the basic beliefs of Christianity, written by conservative scholars. The conservative churches also published statements of faith, and our own Baptist Statement of Faith and Message (1925) was one such. The conflict between these opposing camps became fierce, and conservatives came to distrust any mention of the “social gospel.”

After World War II Carl F. H. Henry and other leaders, like Billy Graham and Harold Ockenga,
sought a middle way—a way that would display fidelity to the Bible and also address human needs. They called their movement the “Evangelical Movement.” In recent years many Evangelicals, especially younger ones, are calling for a more holistic approach to foreign missions and church ministry. For example, the amount of money donated for the alleviation of poverty overseas has increased tremendously in proportion to the amount given for evangelism and church planting. As a result, Evangelical missions agencies focus on holistic ministries in their fundraising.

What can we say about this? Certainly, we accept our obligation to make disciples of all nations and also to love our neighbor as ourselves. These are not contradictory commandments. Some Christians demonstrate a passion for missions, while others express their concern for “human needs ministry” (to use the IMB’s term). Surely, that is a good thing. We need plenty of both. In our churches, we recognize that some members have a passion for children’s ministry, and others serve as champions for ministry to shut-ins. Jesus Christ provides us with a way to resolve this dilemma. Jesus came preaching the good news of the Kingdom, but He also fed the hungry and healed the sick. Our foreign missionaries have always done this. Certainly, they have preached the gospel and planted churches. They have also established schools, founded hospitals, and built orphanages around the world. Properly done, human needs ministry opens the door for evangelism, and going about doing evangelism brings one into contact with those who have physical needs. I like to tell my students that one hand washes the other. They work together to bless people in every way.

In “Paradigms in Conflict” David Hesselgrave makes that very point. Missionaries should engage in both types of ministry: evangelism and human needs. In the end, though, he insists that evangelistic ministry must be our highest priority. Why so? Evangelistic efforts address humanity’s deepest need—the need for eternal salvation. Feeding, healing, educating, and freeing persons from oppression are important and needful. Those ministries deserve our attention and activity, but they meet temporal needs. In his final words to His disciples (Acts 1:8) Jesus commanded them to witness about Him in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and the whole world. He did not speak of alleviating physical and social needs. This then is “prioritism.” It acknowledges responsibility Christians have to meet human needs, but it recognizes the greatest human need is reconciliation with God through Christ.

Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

About Mark Terry

John Mark Terry is Professor of Missions at Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary in Cordova, Tennessee. He earned a Ph.D. at SWBTS, served with the IMB in Southeast Asia for 24 years and later as Professor of Missions at SBTS. He is the author of eight books, many journal articles and curriculum materials for LifeWay.

Notify of

Allen Calkins

A similar exists between political activism and gospel proclamation. Many Christians, IMHO, are putting too many of their eggs in the politics basket when it comes to moral issues like abortion, same sex marriage and political correctness. BUT, that being said, no Christian should ignore politics and simply ‘Preach Jesus’.

October 15, 2018 8:01 am

Mark Smith

Allen, I think I know what you mean, but consider if Hillary Clinton had made the appointment now filled by Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. I think many things Christians take for granted would be under direct assault and threat. We have a responsibility to oppose this in the political arena since we have been given that responsibility by God with our form of government. Government is not our savior, but it can be a shield.

October 15, 2018 9:37 am

Debbie Kaufman

Mark: Your above comment seems to be speaking from both sides of your mouth. I say this with all due respect. As long as it is the issues you care about, then we have a responsibility, but when it comes to issues of race, we are just to preach the Gospel. I of course disagree. The story of the good Samaritan comes to mind among many other passages that speak of Christians and Social Justice.

October 15, 2018 9:44 am

Michael White

Mark,
I agree with your take mostly.
Maybe completely but there is a thing I would add that you may or may not agree with.

We are to love God with all, and our neighbor as ourself. We love God by obedience both to the Great Commission and by loving our neighbor. We love our neighbor by proclaiming the Gospel to him or her and by seeing as best we can to meet their needs. These needs would include food, clothing, shelter, safety, companionship, and the like.

I said neighbor because I can’t nor can my church really love those in another community. Not directly. But we can indirectly through trusted groups like the IMB.

Neither myself nor the congregation I attend can help everyone in our big city. Nor even all in the South end, not even all in our part of the South end. We are few and the needs are great. Thus we can and should do two things:

1. Locally: we should witness the Gospel to, and give to meet the needs of, our neighbors, which is defined by those we meet in life as we live it.

2. Globally: we should give what we can to trusted organizations like IMB, NAMB, and the CP so that through those groups not only will the Gospel be proclaimed in places where we aren’t but also earthly needs will be at least somewhat alleviated.

Politics: no one is going to Hell for voting Democrat. Abortion: Republicans didn’t do anything to stop it when they controlled both Houses and the Presidency and they also voted to continue to fund Planned Parenthood. Even recently.

Social Justice: it cannot deliver Justice to anyone since Injustice is a product of the sinful heart. Good deeds can’t stop sinning. Do do your best to care for those in need but open your eyes because there will always be those needs because there will always be sin until the Lord’s return.
In other words: you can’t transform society by good deeds. The world is getting worse not better and it always has been since the Fall

October 15, 2018 10:49 am

Michael White

To be clear,
I was responding to Mark Terry not Mark Smith.
Sorry for any confusion.

October 15, 2018 11:24 am

Mark Smith

Debbie, I think you are addressing Mark Terry, and not me, Mark Smith. Correct?

October 15, 2018 2:25 pm

Louis

I believe this is a really good post. Thanks for writing it.

October 15, 2018 10:23 am

Allen Calkins

Obviously (I hope), every Christian understands the need to be politically aware/involved, compassionate and concerned about needs of humanity AND gospel proclaimers. But there needs to be a balance.

October 15, 2018 10:35 am

Michael White

Allen,

I disagree.
Not every Christian needs to be involved in politics.
But to the rest, I do agree, Every Christian should be “compassionate and concerned about needs of humanity AND gospel proclaimers.”
Was Paul involved in politics?
Was Jesus?
We should be good citizens of the country we live in, no matter which country or where or when.
In the USA it means for one thing to vote.
So I guess to that extent, we are to be involved in politics.
But other than that, to some, if they feel led, they should get more involved, and for others who do not feel led, they shouldn’t.
Neither the fate of the country nor of the Church depends on how involved we are or not in politics.
We serve our country and the people in it, best, by the rest of your word: “[to be] compassionate and concerned about needs of humanity AND gospel proclaimers.”

October 15, 2018 11:36 am

Nate

Michael, Paul was involved in politics. He did not give up his Roman citizenship and, he used it any and every time it was advantageous for him to do so. Jesus’ mission was not Paul’s. If we abstain from participating in our duties as citizens when it can have an advantage for the gospel, then we might not be as effective as we could be. Paul would have been dead long before he actually did die had he given up his citizenship and political voice. Furthermore, I’m not sure Paul was seen as a “good” citizen by most of the other Roman Citizens, otherwise he might not have ended up in prison so often.

October 15, 2018 1:09 pm

Michael White

Nate,

What Paul did wasn’t politics.
Any more than a US citizen in Turkey claiming he is a US citizen. He wasn’t involved in politics.
And you know which of your duties as a citizen when done gives an advantage to the Gospel? One might think religious freedom would be an advantage for the Gospel but as they look at history they find the church flourishing in persecution and stagnant when living at ease.
We should be good citizens but let’s not go beyond the truth available to us. For then we are using human reasoning and not wisdom from above.
Your last remark is telling: the wisdom the world uses falls short to understand God and His ways and plans.
So tell me what political issues did Paul stand for, what candidates did he vote for, and how many protests against injustices did he attend?
When he stood before the rulers and authorities, what was the content of his message to them?

And yet, through his example, the preaching of the Gospel, the Roman world was turned upside down

October 15, 2018 7:55 pm

Nate

He wasn’t a US citizen in Turkey. In other words, he wasn’t out of his country in a different one. He was a citizen of the Empire during his trips. He used political speech constantly. And yes, withholding your citizenship, and then using it, as was done in Philippi, was a political maneuver designed to be an advantage for the gospel. In Jerusalem he pit the Pharisees against the Sadduccees by claiming he was on trial for the Resurrection. This is both political and religious speech.

However, I was mainly referring to the notion that some Christians have who believe citizens of the US can abstain from politics (participation/voting) and then complain about religious injustice and the eroding of religious freedom. While I will agree the gospel will go forth, even in the midst of persecution, I am not one who believes we should usher in persecution (by abstaining from being involved in politics). Furthermore, in being involved in politics, there is opportunity to preach the gospel. One may not get elected or be liked, but the notion of separation of church and state is a completely bogus lie made up by those who wish to remove the topic of the gospel from any political speech or office.